Minority v subsytéme kultúry

There are various ways of defining national identification. It was impossible to classify them in such a way as observed in1995. Therefore the following typology was used:• Clear identification – Pole, German, Silesian.• Twofold or threefold identification: Silesian – Pole, Pole – Silesian – Germany.• Identification by defining nationality and origin.The way to determine ones affiliation is becoming increasingly complex and heterogeneous. In comparison to previousstudies the percentage of people who are able to define their nationality as Polish or as German decreased (1995 – 65 % ofthe total, in 2005 – 30.6 % of total). Polish nationality is invariably declared by respondents with migrant origin. However, thedeclining amount of those respondents is one of the reasons for lower declaration of Polish identification. It is also interestingthat there is a drastic reduction in the percentage of people declaring their German nationality. Young respondents preferred thevarious other terms highlighting their relationship to the German nation than clear uniform definition of affiliation. However,there was a significant increase in the percentage of people who consciously did not reply to that question. This demonstratesthe lack of need for reflection on national identification and the conscious avoidance of such declarations. People who avoidedanswering were of autochthonous origin. There was an increase in the percentage of respondents who described their nationalidentification in a variety of different ways. There are several possible reasons for this. This is certainly a result of our accession tothe EU, where Germany, being a member, is also seen as part of the community. The second reason is the even closer ties withGermany and its people through work connection by autochthons. The third reason is the social and political acquiescence todeclare the type of national identification in the borderlands.In a similar manner as described above, respondents reported their identification in 2008/2009. The following table showsthe results.Nationality Number %Poles 150 43,8Poles and Silesians 69 20,1Silesians 80 23,4Silesians and Germans 29 8,5Germans 9 2,6Others 1 0,3No answer 4 1,2Total 342 100Tab. 4 National identification of the respondents (2008/2009). N=342. Source: Own research and calculations.These studies demonstrated the continued reluctance to declare a clear national identification. The study was conductedamong the adult population which resulted in a higher proportion of people defining themselves as Poles, and only 2.6% as Germans.At the same time nearly 60 % of respondents defined themselves in many ways, in order to not clearly define themselves.As is typical, the percentage of people declaring German identification decreased which proves the reduction in the number ofGermans. However, There was an increase in the percentage of people declaring Silesian ethnic identification. Instead of Germannational declaration, respondents preferred a more labile way to declare their affiliation, choosing ethnic declaration. There istherefore a transition from German to Silesian identification.132